A special judge and prosecutor have been asked to handle the criminal case of a Hamilton County magistrate facing felony possession of methamphetamine charges after a police sting operation.

William Greenaway, 50, was charged Monday with meth possession, resisting law enforcement and obstructing justice, all felonies, following a bust last week in which the jurist allegedly swallowed the evidence and had to be hospitalized.

His arrest jeopardizes his judicial career, forces the court to juggle his caseload and raises eyebrows over drug cases the judge himself may have presided over.

Deputy Prosecutor Andre Mishka said his office has asked that a special prosecutor and judge handle the prosecution of Greenaway to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest.

His cases are being assigned to other judges, retired judges and lawyers, court administrator Orval P. Schierholz said. Magistrates have the same duties as judges but are not elected, lack their own courtrooms and are chosen by judges to work under them.

A Superior Court magistrate for eight years, Greenaway has been suspended.

Indiana State Police began investigating Greenaway when a drug seller told officers the judge and a woman he was dating were buying and using meth, detectives said in a probable cause affidavit filed with the Hamilton County courts.

He was arrested Wednesday after State Police set up a meth purchase with an informant who told them the judge was a regular user, according to court records. The buy was in a room in Noblesville that police captured on video and audio.

Investigators said after Greenaway paid the informant $140 for 2.5 grams of meth, they drove to a Walmart parking lot so the drugs could be handed over to Greenaway. As soon as that happened, police closed in on Greenaway's 2017 Ford Explorer to make the arrest.

When the magistrate saw the police approach, he swallowed the bag of meth, the affidavit said. One of the officers tried to pry the bag out of Greenaway's mouth and was bit on the thumb, according to police.

Greenaway was taken to Riverview Health emergency room in Noblesville and spent the night.

He told police he was "set-up" by the informant who put the the bag of meth into his hand. Once he realized what it was, he told detectives, he panicked and swallowed it when he saw the officers approach.

Efforts Monday by IndyStar to reach Greenaway by phone were unsuccessful. Court records did not identify an attorney on his behalf.

Each of the charges he faces is a Level 6 felony, each punishable by up to 2.5 years in prison.

His arrest last week left the Hamilton County courts scrambling and an uncertain future for Greenaway, who became an Indiana lawyer in 1996.

Charles Geyh, a professor at the Indiana University Maurer School of Law, said the felony charges meant Greenaway is automatically suspended with pay under Indiana’s rules of court.

A conviction could lead to Greenaway being sanctioned, disbarred, removed from his position or forced to retire.

“The judicial code of conduct includes a provision that judges follow the law," Geyh said. "And that is distinct from their duty to uphold the law on the bench. They have a duty to abide by the law. If they don’t, they’re subject to discipline and removal from the office."

Whether a conviction could affect prior rulings in Greenaway’s court depends on the case. If he is convicted of drug possession, a decision he might have rendered in a robbery case likely would be unaffected.

On the other hand, cases are often called into question when the judge is in a situation in which the crime might suggest broader troubles, Geyh said.

Geyh noted as an example the “kids for cash” case in which a Pennsylvania judge sentenced juveniles to private prisons from which he was getting kickbacks. “That resulted in a profoundly difficult appearance problem where the judge was closely linked to his decision-making," Geyh said.

"In the ordinary course, criminal conduct can vary from trivial to very serious," Geyh said. "In serious cases it can result in a removal from the bench. Whether it’s going to have an impact on a judge’s decision is very much case sensitive and isn’t going to be automatic because it's enormously burdensome on (prosecutors) to retry those cases.”